Xiaoqi Feng 0:03 So now we can officially start this session. And sorry about the little drama we had. There's a lot of waiting about the virtual conference because that means wherever you are, and we can all be in the same room. Welcome to Urban health, built environment, and nature based solutions conference session. I'm Xiaoqi Feng, Associate Professor in urban health and environment at UNSW and co-lead of urban health and built environment research theme at the new NHMRC-funded HEAL Research Network. I would like to show my respects and acknowledge the Bedegal people who are the traditional custodians of the land, Elders past and present on the land I am speaking from today. Urban health and the built environment is the largest research theme in the HEAL network with 30 investigators. We will have more activities and events in the coming years. Today, Dr Emily Flies from University of Tasmania and Dr Nicola Willand at RMIT will host this session together. They are both outstanding early career researchers in the research theme, and I thank them and others for organising today's session. We will also have a few other early career researchers to present today. And I'm very glad we are able to provide this platform for them to shine. Over to you, Emily and Nikki. Nicola Willand 1:38 Thank you, Xioqi. And I'll start of because Emily's actually our first speaker today. So you've got five minutes and two minutes for questions. And we'll have to be quite strict with time because we only have 40 minutes. So Dr Emily Flies is a lecturer and coordinator of Backyard Biodiversity and the co-lead of the Health Landscapes research group at the University of Tasmania and Emily's going to talk about understanding Urban Nature health benefits. Do you want to share your screen Emily? Emily Flies 2:11 Thanks so much Nikki. Let's see if this works. Hello, and thanks for attending the Urban Health built environments and nature based solutions for health session today. My name is Dr Emily Flies and before I talk about my work and understanding the health benefits of urban nature, I want to first acknowledge the traditional owners of the land I am on today and give thanks and respect to the Palawa people of Lutruwita Tasmania. So first, let's talk about cities and health. Cities are fascinating, complex environments. There's an incredible variation both within and among cities, and therefore variation in the ways that cities can impact our health. Overall, in developed nations city living can be good for human health. People living in cities, on average, live longer, healthier lives. In Australia, males in cities live about 10 years longer, and females live about 15 years longer than their counterparts in very remote areas of Australia. Greater access to jobs, social interactions, and medical resources play an important role in those wellbeing benefits. But cities can also have negative effects on health. In 2019 I published a first examination of urban-associated diseases. With my colleagues, we found that people living in cities can have a greater risk of developing certain diseases including allergies, asthma, cardiovascular disease, some cancers and mental health conditions. We explored the potential drivers of these urban associations, one of which is altered exposure to environmental microbial communities. One of the consistent and well known trends in urban health is that living near and interacting with urban nature is good for health. This is one example of conceptualising some of the connections between urban nature and human health. Here we highlight that microbiome pathway, where urban nature exposes us to bio-diverse microbial communities, which impacts on the human microbiome, our immune system and our health. Microbiomes are emerging as an important driver of human health. They're connected to everything from how we metabolise our food and pharmaceuticals, to anxiety and depression. So there may be an important connection between the negative health effects of urban living and the positive effects of interacting with biodiversity urban nature. There's emerging work showing that the human microbiome is influenced by the environmental microbiome, and that, generally, exposure to more bio-diverse microbial environments is better for health. Craig Liddicoat presentation later in this session will highlight some of his exciting experimental work connecting environmental microbiomes to human and mouth microbiomes and their health impacts. In this paper, some colleagues and I showed that at the class level, all the main human gut microbes are present in ocean or soil environments. So we're clearly connected to the microbes in soil and water. We also breathe millions of microbes every day. So last year, I did a systematic review to explore the impact of cities on airborne microbial communities. I found that urban sites were much more likely to have a lower abundance of airborne microbes and urban sites typically had less diverse airborne microbial communities that fits with what we know of urban-associated diseases. So with that said, I mentioned earlier that cities are complex places, and they do have different types of land use. So together with an HDR student Jess Pearson and my colleague Penny Jones, shown here, we've been exploring the microbiomes around Hobart, and how the diversity of those soil microbiomes changes across land uses and population densities. We found that both green space type, here public versus private, and high use versus low use green spaces, it impacts the soil microbial biodiversity, as does population density. And the trends for bacteria are somewhat as we would expect. However, the trends vary across microbial taxa, which are seldom explored in a single study. So there's a lot more work to be done here to understand urban microbiomes, and their connection with health. So while cities can be good for health, they appear to host a different and perhaps lower microbial diversity than their more natural counterparts. And while Urban Nature generally benefits health, variation, including variation in microbial diversity across urban green spaces, may be an important and under explored component connecting urban nature and health. Importantly, we don't yet know how the microbiome wellbeing pathway interacts with other wellbeing pathways. So like how urban nature supports physical activity, social engagement and clean air, and how those different pathways activate different facets of our well being, social, emotional, physical well being and so on. Unravelling those different mechanisms and how they're activated by different types of nature and for different people would help inform decisions around urban greening and public health measures like green prescribing, which is why together with colleagues at the Healthy Landscapes group at UTas, I hope to continue un-picking the mechanisms connecting urban nature and multifaceted wellbeing. Thanks for listening, and I'll take any questions at the end of the session. Nicola Willand 7:38 Thank you, Emily. And we will just keep our applause right towards the end, when everyone has presented. I think you may need to stop sharing your screen because we've got our next speaker coming up. And that is Dr. Ricardo Paolini. He is senior lecturer at the University of New South Wales in the Arts Design architectures to uphold environment. And Ricardo is going to talk about urban overheating mitigation technologies and heat related mortality. Over to you Ricardo Ricardo Paolini 8:15 Thank you very much. So why it's not moving? Okay. So, how many people die in cities? So we know around 476 die because of heat-related mortality and about 4000 every year because of cold-related mortality, with some fluctuations as you see around 60 with peaks up of 130. Where do people die? We know that people die predominantly inside, and especially in, low income housing. These are some measurements that we performed across New South Wales, measuring indoor air temperatures as high as 40 degrees during hot periods. One nice feature of the Australian climates is that the temperature drops during the night. These are measured data within the urban environment in Parramatta and the dashed lines are Bureau of Metereology data. So you see, they are consistently warmer because of urban overheating, but also the temperature drops during the night because of the penetration of the sea breeze, etc. With climate change, we will likely see an increase also in night temperature, which might lead to greater mortality and getting heat waves that look more like those in continental Europe. So this is from research I've done in my former life in the other hemisphere, on the heatwave of 2003 in Europe. And especially when you have a prolonged periods of very hot nights, you have a peak of mortality with people unable to cool down in the buildings. We've done some work on the mitigation of heat mitigation. So this is in Darwin and here you see peak air temperature reduction of up to 2.5 degrees with a combination of greenery or reflective roofing and the like. And all of this by lowering the peak outdoor air temperature leads to a reduction in the number of heat-related deaths. So something like six people or so over a population of one hundred, per 1000 people. Something similar within Sydney. So this is mesoscale modelling and here we see eight scenarios ranging from an increasing albedo of the area to 2 million additional trees, increasing the irrigation of the trees, etc., etc., to the peak of 5 million additional trees, which was one of the ideas of the other government. Where to find a space for this trees it's a little bit more challenging. Anyhow. So we know that with temperature increase by two degrees, we see climate anomalies just so heat related mortality increased by 5% in Parramatta, therefore, reducing the outdoor temperature with mitigation can reduce the heat-related mortality normally in this case by approximately 1.4 per 100,000 people. So something helpful, but still not enough. Also at the present time just competing the heat-related mortality risk with existing correlation we see that heat waves and heat-related mortality stop after the second half of February, while in the future we are likely to see more and for longer, and with heat mitigation we can reduce it but we can, we just contain it. We contain it because the most important thing we can do is to work on buildings as we saw those crazy indoor air temperatures that we measured by, with modelling we see here that with reflective roofing and these are for houses built according to the code, to the National Construction Code, with reflective roofing we can reduce during heatwaves the indoor temperature by 3.5 or 4 degrees. This is just for, with a simple intervention. And it's very important because we cannot rely on air conditioning because when we have heat waves and we'll have more in the future, we risk of having more and more disruption to the electrical grid. So power outages. So to conclude, we need to intervene to reduce heat-related mortality with both an overheating mitigation and building thermal efficiency. So with a variety of strategies, not just one, a single one is not sufficient. And also just betting everything on air conditioning is not a reliable response because of blackouts and also we leave out the energy poor people. Thank you. Emily Flies 13:18 Thanks so much, Ricardo. Next up we have Dr Craig Liddicoat. Right if you can start sharing your slides. Craig is a research fellow in restoration genomics in the college of Science and Engineering at Flinders University in Adelaide. Craig Liddicoat 13:36 Hi, my name is Craig. I'll be speaking on restoring health promoting microbial diversity: a role for biodiverse plant soil systems. I'd like to acknowledge my co-authors listed here. I'll start with the statement that the greening of urban environments will undoubtedly play a role in supporting future population health through shade, cooling, aesthetics, mental health and other pathways. But today, I want to describe some less appreciated pathways whereby urban green space can help support human health. And this will expand on some of the ideas that Emily presented earlier. Because taking all these pathways into account, there's potential to maximise the human health benefits. Conversely, we could be spending a lot of money and not getting the full benefit. Specifically, I'm talking about biodiversity, microbial diversity and emerging evidence of the role played by soil. So exposure to microbial diversity is recognised by the World Health Organisation as critical to supporting human health. Microbial exposures help to prime or educate and eventually regulate our immune system and should start from an early age. Microbes including bacteria, fungi and viruses outnumber us. We are more microbial than human and microbial communities or microbiota are shaped by many factors including the environment. Increasingly modern medicine is showing many links between the microbiota of our skin, airway and gut to both health and disease. So this is including asthma as a Aunty Linda was talking about in the introduction this morning. For some key concepts to introduce you to. So the biodiversity hypothesis has come from medical research as an immunologist, and this is the idea that reduced exposure to natural microbial diversity is connected to the rising incidence of allergic autoimmune and chronic inflammatory disease across modern society. The old friends' mechanism is another idea that there are certain key species of microbes that we've learned to live with over evolutionary timeframes, and are likely to be required to support our health. I should just say on gone pretty quick, I'll have my email at the end, and I'm happy to share slides. So microbes from the environment, can support our health in at least four ways. They contribute to the protective microbial communities, shown in the example here, neighbouring the cells that line the gut; they contribute to immune signalling triggering either defensive inflammation or tolerance inducing anti inflammatory responses; they can add to immune memory through antibodies; and they can help produce beneficial metabolites or break down products such as short chain fatty acids. So we're essentially talking about co-evolution between microbes and humans. And diversity can help contain pathogenicity. We're talking about biological connection between the environment and our own human health. And these processes can influence the whole body and both infectious and non-communicable diseases. So he, here's an idea for you to think about. This is a hypothetical dose response relationship with health response on the y-axis, and exposure to a particular microbe on the x-axis. And in hospitals, we have this way of thinking where everything should be super clean and here, the only good microbe is a dead microbe, right? Let's just get everything super clean. But should we be thinking about this in our everyday lives? Sure, too much exposure to any particular microbe is going to be bad. But a lack of microbial exposures and reduced immune training is linked to immune dysfunction, perhaps with low exposures to some beneficial old friends together in a diverse community it could be where we find the happy medium. Poor diet and life style and antibiotics can cause the loss of key microbes, with potential that impact down family lines. But our gut is dominated by spore forming bacteria, so this potential for beneficial bacteria to be active in the anaerobic gut, and things move along, and then they form these, conform a resistant spore to survive and potentially transport in the environment until things become suitable again. So we have this idea of our own protective microbial communities and that's further protected and maybe resupplied by the external environment. So some evidence. We know that children living on farms have reduced asthma and allergies. But further again, traditional farming communities such as the Amish, who are more hands on, working with animals and organic manures, they have lower rates of asthma and allergies again compared to the Hutterites who use more industrialised practices. In my studies exposed to white box soil compared to clean bedding, the soil exposures modify gut communities and produce immune biomarkers for tolerance-inducing or anti-inflammatory responses. In a human invented intervention study involving the introduction of some biodiverse plant soil materials, so forest undergrowth and some plants, lawn turf into daycare yards; children showed improved immune system biomarkers within one month. In my own PhD studies, this is some spatial epidemiology here, I found that the quality of green space not just any old green space, it was the quality of biodiversity of green space that correlated with improved respiratory health outcomes across regional Australia. Additionally, I found that local government areas with better quality soil, and typically higher microbial diversity in soil had reduced rates of infectious and parasitic disease. Looking at soil bacterial communities that are favoured across a biodiversity gradient, from disturbed to natural plants or systems, a simple message emerged: in disturbed soils where the food for microbes is simple and unreliable, we're encouraging more opportunists, the fast growing generalists. In other words, more potential pathogens. Whereas at the other end in natural biodiverse systems, we found more slow growing nature-adapted bacteria suited to the complex organic food sources of those systems. Lastly, in a mouse study, we found signs of a new potential health promoting pathway involving soil-associated butyrate-producing bacteria that could be supplemented to the gut via ambient airborne exposures. Butyrate is a breakdown product of plant based material, and also a key metabolite for nourishing the cells that line our gut. So this is an area currently being expanded on by Joel Brame in Martin Breed's lab at Flinders University, where Joel is working to better understand the natural environments in which these butyrate-producing bacteria may thrive and if there is potential to enhance beneficial exposures in human populations. Joel's also got a poster in there. So that's all I've got. Thank you. Emily Flies 19:57 Thanks so much, Craig. Next up we have Dr Merched Azzi. Merched, can you start sharing your slides, please? Merched is a research scientist at New South Wales DPIE in the climate and atmospheric science branch, leading the air quality modelling and Forecasting team. Over to you, Merched. Merched Azzi 20:30 Hi. Good afternoon everyone, can you hear me? (Yes, we can). Okay, thank you very much for your time. And today I would like... I'm Merched Azzi from New South Wales Department of Planning Industry and Environment in the Climate Atmospheric Science branch, and today, I would like to really talk to you about Health Impact Assessment due to dust events using observation and chemical transport models. This work has been done mainly by my colleagues in collaboration with Geoff Morgan and Ivan Hannigan from the University. Okay, so when we talk about dust storms, we understand that our environment here in Australia is prone for frequent, intense and different magnitude of dust storms that occur at different places. And we know the causes mainly because of dry weather or climate change, due to climate change or other conditions. And those dust storms will transport with them different types of soil, it could be sand and other things. And they will be transported downwind 100, could be hundreds of kilometres downwind. And they will affect, people will be exposed to them depending on where they will be. And they occur across a whole world not just in Australia. North Africa, as you can see in this slide. And because it is matter of emissions and export concentration, and exposure to this concentration, then look at health impact. So it we at DPIE, we constructed what we call an integrated approach for air quality management. We can look, this system looks at inputs and those inputs can come for example in this case, is windblown dust from different directions. And we assess those emissions and we look at meteorological components affecting this transport, and we determine some emissions from that one and those emission will feed into what we call air quality models that are based on looking at meteorological models and chemical transport models if there are chemical reactions to occur, that's what will happen. And from this one then we can calculate concentration, look at exposure, produce pollution maps, produce alerts, and even we can have access to NASA worldwide visualisation dashboard and where we can use them and make it available for people. So, the whole process is that is available at our DPIE gas branch and we are using it for all events including bushfires, dust storms or any normal or not, abnormal situations. So, this system will we have used it for our study which we carried out during February 2019, when we had this dust storm and we have used a chemical transport model which called WRF-Chem model, which over a large continental scale domain and also is covering really the continent and outside the continent. And the study for this dust storm will show how the plume has been transported downwind and how much has affected the health of populations that were exposed at different.. as a for those density.. Oh sorry. Statistical areas level four (SA4). Sorry. Okay is a, we know that WRF-Chem is a very advanced model, has different modules to estimate and follows the transport of dust from that one. And as you can see, I nominated here some of this model which we have imposed into the model which we have configured. And we use a topographic sand erodibility, okay, which you see to the right. And that one goes from zero to one, depending on how erodity of the soil. Emily Flies 25:49 Hi Merched. You have five minutes if you can try to wrap up in one so Nicola has time to present after you. Sorry, we got started the session late so we're pushing towards the end. Thanks. Merched Azzi 26:02 I couldn't catch you properly. Anyway, what we have here I have prediction of the model and observe with that compare very well with that one, and I push hard in this and those dusts, they were originated mainly with the west and southwest winds and taking this sand from different places across the Sydney region and whole New South Wales and across even went down to New Zealand. And we calculated the PM2.5 averages across the whole areas that covered by the model. Emily Flies 26:45 Right. I think Merched, I think I'll have to cut you off. I'm really sorry. But the session ends in five minutes. And we need to give Nicolas some time to present as well. Would you mind having the slides available? If anyone would like to catch up on the rest of it? (It's fine). Yeah, sorry about that. It's because we got started late this session. Merched Azzi 27:07 Yeah, but I have two slides to go. Anyway, I'll show you one slide before we go. What we were able here no one has done that one yet. Okay. We go as I said for SA4 to calculate, okay, mortality and cardiovascular diseases as well as respiratory diseases of people exposed to these tasks, anyway. Okay. Emily Flies 27:32 Thank you so much. (No problem). If you can stop sharing while I introduce our last speaker for tonight, for today. So last up we have Dr Nichola Willand and Dr Nigel Goodman. Nicola is a lecturer in the School of property construction and project management at RMIT, and Dr Nigel Goodman is the Vice Chancellor's postdoctoral research fellow at RMIT. Thanks, guys. Hopefully they give us a little extra time to finish up. Nicola Willand 28:05 Can you hear me now? Yeah. Excellent. So we come to you from the Kulin and Woi wurrung language group nations land. I'm going to talk about indoor temperatures and links to residential energy efficiency and equity, and Nigel will follow with indoor air quality. So cold and hot homes are health risks. Roughly 3% of Australian households feel unable to leave their home because of financial distress and over half of heat related deaths and coroner files are linked to conditions within buildings. Cold homes can lead to mould and dampness, increase the risk of infectious diseases, respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, hypothermia, chill blaines, and avoidable deaths. And hot homes can lead to hyperthermia and also to avoidable mortality as we've already covered. Cold and hot homes also have an equity dimension as they are often linked to energy poverty. Concern about energy bills and perceived lack of control can negatively affect mental health, compromises on social activities, school trips, and job interviews that require costly transport represent social health risks, and risk factors include being older or ill, especially isolated or living in an older and un-efficient building, or not having or not using air conditioning. My own research asks whether retrofits can reverse the aetiology of cold and hot home related ill health, or at least be preventative. Steigerung was based on a realist review of intervention studies and shows that better warmth and greater satisfaction with the home where the main pathways from retrofits to better health. Evidence for negative impacts due to inadequate ventilation was rare, but the rest should not be dismissed. Importantly, even small scale thermal retrofits or plants upgrades provided appreciable health benefits. Paradoxes and surprising outcomes in retrofit trials, however, suggest that to better understand health outcomes from retrofits, you need a nuanced understanding of contextual factors, such as household practices and expectations, and the retrofit process itself. This really called for mixed methods research. Finally this diagram is based on a mixed method retrofit trial evaluation I did myself and shows that residential energy efficiency and health are part of a larger socio-technical system. Diagram illustrates the links between the thermal quality of the dwelling, household skills and health status, and the meanings of keeping warm and falling few. And over to you, Nigel. Nigel Goodman 30:41 Thanks so much, Nikki. Thank you so much. I might skip the first couple of slides in the interest of time. So that's just me working in my previous career. Yep, thanks so much. So this slide here is really just to give you an overall overview of some of the challenges and opportunities. We all know that buildings contribute a lot to our energy use, and certainly to the amount of greenhouse gas emissions. Just focusing on the opportunities, possible negative health, climate and environmental effects can be reduced by changes to buildings, and how we occupy and operate these indoor spaces. And it's these indoor spaces that are really interested in: indoor air quality. So by indoor air quality we, the lose definition or approximate definition, is the quality of air within buildings that can impact occupant health and well-comfort and well-being. So we look at different sources of indoor pollutants and these can be from building materials, from fragrance consumer products, occupant activities, such as cooking and cleaning. Now people spend so much of their time indoors that exposure to some of those pollutants for instance, VOCs, is actually where we get the majority of our exposure to those pollutants. Not all pollutants with VOCs. It certainly is where we are most exposed indoors. In addition, when ambient air quality is heavily polluted, for instance, during bushfires, concentrations of indoor pollutants can increase substantially, resulting in poor indoor air quality. So we'd like, I'd like to mention some findings from a recent paper that I co-authored with Professor Priya Rajagopalan on improving indirect qualities in bushfire during bushfire smoke events. The study evaluated the impact of bushfire smoke on indirect quality and explore different monitoring techniques used to measure pollutants and assess the influence of the building envelope filtration technologies and portable air cleaners used to improve indoor air quality. What was interesting was that found, I mean, we just reported on what other people found really, but essentially, looking at the literature, Australian homes are very leaky. So the national average in 2017 was 15 air changes per hour and much, much leaker than homes in the US. Levels of PM2.5 reached around 500 micrograms per metre cube. So in terms of strategies to improve those buildings, looking at the envelope is really critical. So I'm seeing we moved on in the interest of time, I'll keep going on to the next slide. So basically with that, with that in mind, I was involved in a study led by Dr Amanda Wheeler from Australian Catholic University funded by EPA Victoria, looking at residential air change rates in buildings and looking at ways to potentially improve those buildings and what I've showed you here is what we thought and what we found to be... The areas where we thought that you might find leakage, around doors in perforation such as where you have fans etc., we have wall vents. So I think thank you to our colleagues that efficiency matrix for their terrific work. So we found ACH values similar to previous failures in the literature. If we go to the next slide, please just some of the the unexpected areas were things like where you have a new air conditioner installed in a three year old home, massive air leakage around it during construction between two laminated beams, some air leakage around that as well, around the skirting boards of homes and also in cavity sliding doors. Really important points of air leakage and therefore potentially for smoke infiltration. Next slide please Nikki. So just to mention, Nikki and I and Priya all work in the Sustainable Building Innovation laboratory at RMIT, which the lab looks at research, original research, applied research on the issues affecting a sustainable performance of the built environment. We're Around 16 people and group is led by Priya, I'll finish now. Thank you. Emily Flies 34:24 Thank you guys so much. And we are running over our session. I think we're due to be back though at 3:50pm. So I do want to just check, you know, I apologise to Merched especially for having to hustle you to get through the presentation there because I wasn't sure if they kick us out of this room at 3:40pm exactly. Um, was there anything Merched that you wanted to.. Yeah, just finalising and make any final points at the end of your presentation? Merched Azzi 34:56 Yeah, I think I look at my clock here. It was four minutes rather than five minutes when you stopped me. Emily Flies 35:05 Okay, all right, I apologise. Merched Azzi 35:08 No problem. Anyway. No, I think that's you got my message fine. Emily Flies 35:12 All right. Well, thank you so much. And did anyone have any burning questions for any of the presenters? Before we head back to the main session? Unknown Speaker 35:25 There are many questions and very little time. Emily Flies 35:29 That's true. If you have one priority question Dora, we might be able to get to that. Unknown Speaker 35:34 Well, my question is how much is technology and how much is behavioural change in all the cases that we that we have been discussing here? So how do you make the balance between the technological solutions and the way people behave within this framework? Emily Flies 35:56 Any presenters want to take that on? Ricardo Paolini 36:05 I would, I'm Ricardo, I would say for buildings, it's all design. So designs are decisions. It's human decision. So it's 99% behavioural because you can have all the technology that you want but if people design poor buildings, people design poor buildings. Nicola Willand 36:24 I would just add to that design is one thing but how people use their buildings (yeah) is even more important. As in you can really have it airtight and especially in retrofits, a lot goes into making buildings more airtight, but then people leave that windows open because they are fresh air fix and that's a real behavioural and practices component. Matthew got his hand up. Matthew Riley 36:53 Yeah, thanks, guys. Really great presentations. Just on that point, then, what do we do about ensuring that buildings are actually rated as-built rather than as-designed? Because not only can you not have the best design, you can then not have the best build and it's very interesting to see in a newly beautiful house there in the final presentation, leakages between areas that shouldn't have leakages in them. So it's not just the design, it's actually how the designs built as well. Ricardo Paolini 37:27 You could have neighbours for residential too... Matthew Riley 37:32 Neighbours residential, great. Nicola Willand 37:39 Absolutely right, Matthew. And there's a lot of training going on. So Nigel and I are at the School of property Construction Project Management, and try to instil good building quality into construction management students. Hopefully we'll do a little bit towards better buildings from a quality point of view. As you're buying, building inspections don't look at energy efficiency at the build stage, it's all about design at the moment, and there are no good processes to actually make sure that insulation is in where it's supposed to be, for example. Matthew Riley 38:12 Thanks, Nicola. I think we'll have to leave it there so that people have a couple minutes to run to the bathroom or get a drink before the next plenary session starts. So thank you again to all of the panellists today, all the presenters today and to all of you for attending this session. If you did want to follow up with any of the presenters. I, well, the session will be recorded and will be available after the conference and you can reach out to any of us individually for the slides or with any follow up questions. Thanks again, Nikki, especially for co-hosting and for Xiao for being co-convener of this session as well. And I'll see you all back in the plenary session. Thank you, everyone.